3 ms·
My speculation is the bit of code/data that was broken, is added after the build and testing precisely to avoid the $5 wrench attack. That is, the data is sign
by emmelaich 2y ago
My speculation is the bit of code/data that was broken, is added after the build and testing precisely to avoid the $5 wrench attack.
That is, the data is signed and they don't want to use the real signing key during testing / in the continuous build because then it is too exposed.
So it's added after as something that "could not break". But it of course did.
- phire 2y agoI can think of a bunch of different answers: This wasn't a code update, just a configuration update. Maybe they don't put config update though QA at all, assuming they are safe. It's possible that QA is different enough from production (for example debug builds, or signature checking disabled) that it didn't detect this bug. Might be an ordering issue, and that they tested applying update A then update B, but pushed out update B first. The fact that it instantly went out to all channels is interesting. Maybe they tested it for the beta channel it was meant for (and it worked, because that version of the driver knew how to cope with that config) but then accidentally pushed it out to all channels, and the older versions had no idea what to do wiht it. Or maybe they though they were only sending it to their QA systems but pushed the wrong button and sent it out everywhere.
- emmelaich 2y ago> This wasn't a code update, just a configuration update Configuration is data, data is code.